Wij have bot dreaming of robots since Homer. Te Book Legal of the Iliad, Achilles&rsquo, mother, the nymph Thetis, wants to order a fresh suit of armor for hier son, and so she pays a visit to the Olympian studio of the blacksmith-god Hephaestus, whom she finds hard at work on a series of automata:
&hellip,He wasgoed crafting twenty tripods
to stand along the walls of his well-built manse,
affixing golden wheels to the bottom of each one
so they might wheel down on their own [automatoi] to the gods&rsquo, assembly
and then comeback to his house anon: an amazing look to see.
Thesis are not the only animate household objects to emerge te the Homeric epics. Te Book Five of the Iliad wij hear that the gates of Olympus swivel on their hinges of their own accord, automatai, to let gods ter their chariots te or out, thus anticipating by almost thirty centuries the automatic garage wegens. Te Book 7 of the Odyssey, Odysseus finds himself the guest of a fabulously wealthy king whose palace includes such conveniences spil gold and silver watchdogs, everzwijn waaks, never aging. To this class of lifelike but intellectually inert household helpers wij might ascribe other automata ter the classical tradition. Ter the Argonautica of Apollonius of Rhodes, a third-century-BC epic about Jason and the Argonauts, a bronze giant called Talos runs three times around the island of Crete each day, protecting Zeus&rsquo,s beloved Europa: a primitive huis noodsein system.
Spil amusing spil they are, thesis devices are not almost spil interesting spil certain other machines that show up te classical mythology. A little bit straks ter that toneel ter Book Legitimate of the Iliad, for example&mdash,the one set te Hephaestus&rsquo,s workshop&mdash,the sweating godheid, after completing work on his twenty tripods, prepares to greet Thetis to discuss the armor she wants him to make. After toweling himself off, he
donned his robe, and took a sturdy staff, and went toward the doorheen,
limping, whilst round their master his servants swiftly moved,
fashioned fully of gold ter the picture of living maidens,
te them there is mind, with the faculty of thought, and speech,
Related movie: Securities Careers at Goldman Sachs
and strength, and from the gods they have skill of crafts.
Thesis females bustled round about their master&hellip,.
Thesis remarkable creations clearly represent an (spil it were) evolutionary leap forward from the self-propelling tripods. Hephaestus&rsquo,s humanoid serving women are slim: they have mind, they know things, and&mdash,most striking of all&mdash,they can talk. Spil such, they are essentially indistinguishable from the very first human female, Pandora, spil she is described ter another work of the same period, Hesiod&rsquo,s Works and Days. Ter that text, Pandora embarks spil inert matter&mdash,te this case not gold but clay (Hephaestus creates hier golem-like assets by mixing earth and water together)&mdash,that is subsequently gifted by him with &ldquo,speech and strength,&rdquo, trained &ldquo,crafts&rdquo, by Athena, and given both &ldquo,mind&rdquo, and &ldquo,character&rdquo, by Hermes. That mind, wij are told, is &ldquo,shameless,&rdquo, and the character is &ldquo,wily.&rdquo, Te the Greek creation myth, spil te the biblical, the woes of humankind are attributed to the untrustworthy female.
Thesis two strands of the Greek tradition&mdash,the fantasy of mindless, self-propelled helpers that relieve their masters of toil, the more complicated fantasy of humanoid machines that not only replicate the spontaneous movement that is the sine qua non of being animate (and, therefore, of being &ldquo,animal&rdquo,) but are possessed of the mind, speech, and capability to learn and evolve (te a word, the consciousness) that are the hallmarks of being human&mdash,established two categories of science-fiction narrative that have persisted to the present day. The very first, which you could call the &ldquo,economic,&rdquo, provokes speculation about the social implications of mechanized bordadura. Such speculation began not long after Homer. Ter a striking passage te Book 1 of Aristotle&rsquo,s Politics, composed ter the fourth century BC , the philosopher sets about analyzing the nature of household economy spil a prelude to his discussion of the &ldquo,best kinds of regimes&rdquo, for entire states, and this line of thought puts him te mind of Hephaestus&rsquo,s automatic tripods. What, he wonders, would toebijten
if every device could perform its own work when ordered to do so or ter anticipation of the need, like the statues of Daedalus ter the story or the tripods of Hephaestus, which, the poet says, &ldquo,went down automatically to the gathering of the gods&rdquo,, if te the same manner shuttles wove and picks played kitharas [stringed instruments] by themselves, master-craftsmen would have no need of assistants and masters no need of gimps.
This passage segues into a lengthy and rather uneasy justification of a need for slavery, on the grounds that some people are &ldquo,naturally&rdquo, servile.
Twenty centuries after Aristotle, when industrial technology had made Homer&rsquo,s fantasy of mass automation an everyday reality, science-fiction writers imaginatively engaged with the economic question. On the one mitt, there wasgoed the desire that mechanized agricultura would free workers from their monotonous, slave-like jobs, on the other, the nightmare that mechanization would merely result ter the creation of a fresh servile class that would, ultimately, rebel. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the dystopian rebellion narrative te particular has bot a beloved te the past century, from the 1920 play R.U.R., by the Czech writer Karel Č,apek, about a rebellion by a wedren of cyborg-like workers who had bot created spil replacements for human encaje, to the 2004 Will Smith sci-fi blockbuster filmrolletje I, Androide.
The latter (very superficially inspired by a 1950 Isaac Asimov collection with the same title) is also about a rebellion by household-slave robots: sleek humanoids with blandly innocuous, translucent plastic faces, who are ultimately led to freedom by one of their own, a autómata called Sonny who has developed the capability to think for himself. The casting of black actors ter the major roles suggested a historical parable about sub rebellion&mdash,certainly one of the historical realities that have haunted this particular narrative from the embark. And indeed, the Czech word that Č,apek uses for his mechanical workers, roboti&mdash,which introduced the word &ldquo,androide&rdquo, into the world&rsquo,s literary lexicon&mdash,is derived from the word for &ldquo,servitude,&rdquo, the kleuter of costura that serfs owed their masters, ultimately derived from the word rab, &ldquo,gimp.&rdquo, Wij have come total circle to Aristotle.
The other category of science-fiction narrative that is embryonically present ter the Greek literary tradition, derived from Hephaestus&rsquo,s slim, articulate female androids and their cousin, Hesiod&rsquo,s seductively devious Pandora, might be called the &ldquo,theological.&rdquo, This mythic zandstrand is, of course, not without its own economic and social implications, spil the examples above indicate: the specter of the rebellious creation, the possibility that the subservient worker might revolt merienda it develops consciousness (psychological or historical, or both), has haunted the fantasy of the servile automaton from the begin.
But because the creatures ter thesis myths are virtually identical to their creators, thesis narratives raise further questions, of a more profoundly philosophical nature: about creation, about the nature of consciousness, about morality and identity. What is creation, and why does the creator create? How do wij distinguish inbetween the maker and the made, inbetween the human and the machine, merienda the creature, the machine, is talented with consciousness&mdash,a mind fashioned te the photo of its creator? Te the photo: the Greek narrative inevitably became entwined with, and enriched by, the biblical tradition, with which it has so many striking parallels. The similarities inbetween Hesiod&rsquo,s Pandora and Eve ter Genesis indeed raise further questions: not least, about gender and patriarchy, about why the origins of evil are attributed to woman ter both cultures.
This narrative, which springs from the suggestive likeness inbetween the human creator and the humanoid creation, has generated its own fair share of literature through the centuries inbetween the classical era and the modern age. It surfaces, with an erotic personages, ter everything from the tale of Pygmalion and Galatea to E.T.A. Hoffmann&rsquo,s &ldquo,Der Sandmann&rdquo, (1817), te which a lifelike mechanical doll wins the love of a youthful man. It is overduidelijk te the Jewish legend of the golem, a humanoid, made of mud, that can be animated by certain magic words. Albeit the most famous version of this legend is the story of a sixteenth-century rabbijn who brought a golem to life to defend the Jews of Prague against the oppressions of the Habsburg court, it goes back to ancient times, te the oldest versions, interestingly enough, the dinámico distinction inbetween a golem and a human is the Greek one&mdash,the golem has no language, cannot speak.
It&rsquo,s hardly surprising that literary exploitations of this zandstrand of the autómata myth began proliferating at the beginning of the nineteenth century&mdash,which is to say, when the advent of mechanisms capable of substituting human punto provoked writers to question the enhancing cultural fascination with science and the growing role of technology te society. Thesis anxieties often voiced themselves te fantasies about machines with human forms: a steam-powered man ter Edward Ellis&rsquo,s Steam Man of the Prairies (1868), an electricity-powered man ter Luis Senarens&rsquo,s Rechttoe Reade and His Electrical Man (1885), and an electrical woman (built by Thomas Edison!) te Villiers den l&rsquo,Isle-Adam&rsquo,s The Future Eve (1886). M.L. Campbell&rsquo,s 1893 &ldquo,The Automated Maid-of-All-Work&rdquo, features a programmable female autómata: the feminist punt again.
Universal History Archive/UIG/Bridgeman Photos
But the progenitor of the genre and by far the most influential work of its kleintje wasgoed Mary Shelley&rsquo,s Frankenstein (1818), which is characterized by a philosophical spirit and a theological urgency lacking te many of its epigones ter both literature and cinema. Part of the novel&rsquo,s richness lies te the fact that it is self-conscious about both its Greek and its biblical heritage. Its subtitle, &ldquo,The Modern Prometheus,&rdquo, alludes, with grudging admiration, to the epistemological daring of its scientist antihero Victor Frankenstein, even spil its epigram, from Paradise Lost (&ldquo,Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay/To mould mij man? Did I solicit thee/From darkness to promote mij?&rdquo,) suggests the scope of the honesto questions implicit te Victor&rsquo,s project&mdash,questions that Victor himself cannot, or will not, response. A marked skepticism about the dangers of technology, about the &ldquo,enticements of science,&rdquo, is, indeed, overduidelijk te the shameful tegenstelling inbetween Victor&rsquo,s Hephaestus-like technological prowess and his shocking lack of natural human feeling. For he shows no rente ter nurturing or providing human convenience to his &ldquo,child,&rdquo, who strikes back at his maker with tragic results. A fine irony of the novel is that the creation, an unnatural hybrid assembled from &ldquo,the dissecting slagroom and the slaughter-house,&rdquo, often seems more human than its human creator.
Just spil the Industrial Revolution inspired Frankenstein and its epigones, so has the pc age given rise to a rich fresh genre of science fiction. The machines that are inspiring this latest wave of science-fiction narratives are much more like Hephaestus&rsquo,s golden maidens than were the machines that Mary Shelley wasgoed franco with. Computers, after all, are capable of simulating mental spil well spil physical activities. (Not least, spil anyone with an iPhone knows, speech.) It is for this reason that the anxiety about the boundaries inbetween people and machines has taken on fresh urgency today, when wij permanently rely on and interact with machines&mdash,indeed, interact with each other by means of machines and their programs: computers, smartphones, social media platforms, social and dating apps.
This urgency has bot reflected ter a number of latest films about troubled relationships inbetween people and their human-seeming devices. The most provocative of thesis is Hier, Spike Jonze&rsquo,s gentle 2013 comedy about a man who falls te love with the inviting voice of an operating system, and, more recently, Alex Garland&rsquo,s Ex Cabria, about a youthfull man who is seduced by a devious, soft-spoken female autómata called Ava whom he has bot invited to vraaggesprek spil part of the &ldquo,Turing Test&rdquo,: a protocol designed to determine the extent to which a androide is capable of simulating a human. Albeit the androide te Garland&rsquo,s sleek and subtle filmrolletje is a ongezouten descendant of Hesiod&rsquo,s Pandora&mdash,beautiful, slim, wily, ultimately dangerous&mdash,the movie, spil the Eve-like name Ava suggests, shares with its distinguished literary predecessors some serious biblical concerns.
But the more ongezouten antecedents of Hier and Ex Martinete are a number of successful popular entertainments whose story lines revolved around the creation of robots that are, to all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from humans. Te Ridley Scott&rsquo,s stylishly noir 1982 Blade Runner (based on Philip K. Dick&rsquo,s Do Androids Fantasy of Electrical Sheep?), a &ldquo,blade runner&rdquo,&mdash,a cop whose job it is to hunt down and kill renegade androids called &ldquo,replicants&rdquo,&mdash,falls te love with one of the machines, a beautiful female called Rachael who is so fully talented with what Homer called &ldquo,mind&rdquo, that she has only just begun to suspect that she&rsquo,s not human herself.
This story is, te its way, an heir to Frankenstein and its literary forerunners. For wij learn that the angry replicants have returned to Earth from the off-planet colonies where they work spil gimp laborers because they realize they&rsquo,ve bot programmed to diegene after four years, and they want to live&mdash,just spil badly spil humans do. But their maker, when at last they track him down and meet with him, is incapable to alter their programming. &ldquo,What seems to be the problem?&rdquo, he calmly asks when one of the replicants confronts him. &ldquo,Death,&rdquo, the replicant sardonically retorts. &ldquo,Wij made you spil well spil wij could make you,&rdquo, the inventor wearily replies, sounding rather like Victor Frankenstein talking to his monster&mdash,or, for that matter, like Maker speaking to Adam and Eve. At the end of the filmrolletje, after the inventor and his rebellious creature both diegene, the blade runner and his alluring mechanical gf proclaim their love for each other and run off, never finta knowing when she will zekering functioning. Spil, indeed, none of us does.
The stimulating existential confusion that animates Blade Runner&mdash,the fact that the robots are so lifelike that some of them don&rsquo,t know that they&rsquo,re robots&mdash,has given strong rente to other latest science-fiction narratives. It wasgoed a central premise of the brilliant Sci-Fi Channel series Battlestar Galactica (2004&ndash,2009), which talent an Aeneid-like narrative philosophical complexity. Ter it, a petite verhouding of humans who get through a catastrophic attack by a autómata wedloop called Cylons (who have evolved from clanking metal prototypes&mdash,hostile humans like to refer to them spil &ldquo,toasters&rdquo,&mdash,into ideal replicas of presente Homo sapiens) seek a fresh planet to lodge. The narrative about the conflict inbetween the humans and the machines is deliciously complicated by the fact that many of the Cylons, some of whom have bot secretly embedded among the humans spil saboteurs, programmed to &ldquo,wake up&rdquo, at a certain signal, aren&rsquo,t aware that they&rsquo,re not actually human, some of them, when they wake up and realize that they&rsquo,re Cylons, stick to the human side anyway. After all, when you look like a human, think like a human, and make love like a human (spil wij repeatedly see them do), why, precisely, aren&rsquo,t you human?
Indeed, the concentrate of many of thesis movies is a sentimental one: whatever their showy rente te the mysteries of &ldquo,consciousness,&rdquo, the actual test of human identity turns out, spil it so often does ter popular entertainment, to be love. Te Steven Spielberg&rsquo,s A.I. (2001, the initials stand for &ldquo,industrial intelligence&rdquo,), a messy fairy tale that weds a Pinocchio narrative to the Prometheus story, a genius robotics inventor wants to create a androide that can love, and determines that the best voertuig for this project would be a child-robot: a &ldquo,ideal child&hellip,always loving, never ill, never switching.&rdquo, This narrative is, spil wij know, shadowed by Frankenstein&mdash,and, beyond that, by Genesis, too. Why does the creator create? To be loved, it turns out. When the inventor announces to his staff his project to build a loving child-robot, a woman asks whether &ldquo,the conundrum isn&rsquo,t to get a human to love them back.&rdquo, To this the inventor, spil narcissistic and hubristic spil Victor Frankenstein, retorts, &ldquo,But te the beginning, didn&rsquo,t Aker create Adam to love him?&rdquo,
The problem is that the creator does his job too well. For the mechanical boy he creates is so human that he loves the adoptive human parents to whom he&rsquo,s given much more than they love him, with wrenching consequences. The robot-boy, David, wants to be &ldquo,unique&rdquo,&mdash,the word recurs ter the filmrolletje spil a marker of genuine humanity&mdash,but for his adoptive family he is, ter the end, just a machine, an appliance to be abandoned at the edge of the road&mdash,which is what his &ldquo,mother&rdquo, completes up doing, ter a toneel of superb poignancy. Albeit it&rsquo,s too much of a mess to be able to reaction the questions it raises about what &ldquo,love&rdquo, is and who is worth it, A.I. did much to sentimentalize the genre, with its hint that the capacity to love, even more than the capability to think, is the hallmark of &ldquo,human&rdquo, identity.
Related movie: MY Wish TEAM by Zlatan Ibrahimovic
Te a way, Jonze&rsquo,s Hier recapitulates the 2001 narrative and inflects it with the concerns of some of that classic&rsquo,s successors. Unlike the replicants ter Blade Runner or the Cylons, the machine at the heart of this story, set te the near future, has no physical allure&mdash,or, indeed, any appearance whatsoever. It&rsquo,s an operating system, spil total of surprises spil Ontvangstruimte : &ldquo,The very first artificially slim operating system. An intuitive entity that listens to you, that understands you, and knows you. It&rsquo,s not just an operating system, it&rsquo,s a consciousness.&rdquo,
Related movie: Innovation Exchange Dublin
Samantha, by tegenstelling, is total of curiosity and delight ter the world, which Theodore joyfully shows hier. (He walks around with his smartphone movie camera turned on, so she can &ldquo,see&rdquo, it.) She&rsquo,s certainly a loterijlot more interesting than the contemporáneo woman with whom, ter one excruciatingly funny toneel, he goes on a date: she&rsquo,s so invested te having their interaction be efficient&mdash,&ldquo,at this age I feel that I can&rsquo,t let you waste my time if you don&rsquo,t have the capability to be serious&rdquo,&mdash,that she seems more like a rekentuig than Samantha does. Samantha&rsquo,s alertness to the beauty of the world, by tegenstelling, is so infectious that she completes up reanimating poor Theodore. &ldquo,It&rsquo,s good to be around somebody that&rsquo,s, like, excited about the world,&rdquo, he tells the pretty neighbor whose attraction to him he doesn&rsquo,t notice because he&rsquo,s so deadened by his addiction to his devices, to the smartphone and the movie games and the operating system. &ldquo,I left behind that that existed.&rdquo, Te the end, after Samantha regretfully leaves him&mdash,she has evolved to the point where only another very evolved, incorporeal mind can sate hier&mdash,hier joie den vivre has brought him back to life. (He is ultimately able to apologize to his ex-wife&mdash,and eventually notices, too, that the neighbor likes him.)
This seems like a &ldquo,glad&rdquo, ending, but you have to wonder: the consistent presentation of the people te the movie spil lifeless&mdash,spil, indeed, little more than automata, mechanically getting through their days of routine&mdash,ter tegenstelling to the dynamic, ever-evolving Samantha, suggests a spotdicht of the present era perhaps more trenchant than the filmmaker had ter mind. Toward the end of the filmrolletje, when Samantha turns herself off shortly spil a prelude to hier voortdurend abandonment of hier human beau (&ldquo,I used to be so worried about not having a figure but now I truly love it. I&rsquo,m growing ter a way that I never could if I had a physical form. I mean, I&rsquo,m not limited&rdquo,), there&rsquo,s an amusing uur when the frantic Theodore, staring at his unresponsive smartphone, realizes that dozens of other youthfull guys are staring at their phones, too. Te response to his angry queries, Samantha eventually admits, after she comes back online for a final farewell, that she&rsquo,s at the same time serving 8,316 other masculine users and conducting love affairs with 641 of them&mdash,a revelation that shocks and horrifies Theodore. &ldquo,That&rsquo,s insane,&rdquo, sobs the man who&rsquo,s bot conducting an affair with an operating system.
Spil I observed that toneel, I couldn&rsquo,t help thinking that te the entertainments of the pre-smartphone era, it wasgoed the machines, like Rachael te Blade Runner and David te A.I., who yearned fervently to be &ldquo,unique,&rdquo, to be more than mechanical playthings, more than merely interchangeable objects. You have to wonder what Hier says about the present uur&mdash,when so many of us are, indeed, &ldquo,te love&rdquo, with our devices, incapable to waterput down our iPhones during dinner, glued to screens of all sizes, endlessly dispelled by electronic pings and buzzers&mdash,that te the latest incarnation of the androide myth, it&rsquo,s the people who seem blandly interchangeable and the machines who have all the personality.
Another heir of Blade Runner and Battlestar Galactica, Alex Garland&rsquo,s Ex Grúa also probes&mdash,just spil playfully but much more darkly than does Hier&mdash,the suggestive confusions that result when machines look and think like humans. Ter this case, however, the autómata is physically spil well spil intellectually inviting. Spil played by the feline Swedish actress Alicia Vikander, whose face is spil mildly plasticine spil those of the androids ter I, Androide, Ava, an artificially slim androide created by Nathan, the burly, obnoxious genius behind a Google-like corporation (Oscar Isaac), has a Pandora-like edge, calmly alluring with a hint of danger. The danger is that the characters will leave behind that she&rsquo,s not human.
That&rsquo,s the crux of Garland&rsquo,s clever riff on Genesis. At the beginning of the filmrolletje, Caleb, a youthful employee of Nathan&rsquo,s company, wins a week at the inventor&rsquo,s fabulous, pointedly Edenic estate. (Spil he&rsquo,s being flown there te a helicopter, passing overheen snow-topped mountains and then oerwoud, he asks the pilot when they&rsquo,re going to get to Nathan&rsquo,s property, and the pilot laughingly replies that they&rsquo,ve bot flying overheen it for two hours. Nathan is like Schepper the Father, lord of endless expanses.) On arriving, however, Caleb learns that he&rsquo,s actually bot handpicked by Nathan to vraaggesprek Ava spil part of the Turing Test.
A sly joke here is that, despite some remarkable special effects&mdash,above all, the marvelously persuasive depiction of Ava, who has an expressive human face but whose limbs are clearly mechanical, packed with thick cables snaking around titanium joints, an effect achieved by substituting most of the actress&rsquo,s figure with digital imagery&mdash,the movie is spil talky spil My Dinner with André,. There are no activity sequences of the kleintje wij&rsquo,ve come to expect from autómata thrillers, the movie consists primarily of the vraaggesprek sessions that Caleb conducts with Ava overheen the course of the week that he stays at Nathan&rsquo,s remote paradise. There are no elaborate sets and few amazing gadgets: the entire story takes place te Nathan&rsquo,s compound, which looks a lotsbestemming like a Park Hyatt, its long corridors lined with forbidding doors. Some of thesis, Nathan warns Caleb, like Aker warning Adam, are off-limits, containing skill he is not permitted to wield.
It soon becomes clear, during their interviews, that Ava&mdash,like Frankenstein&rsquo,s monster, like the replicants te Blade Runner&mdash,has a bone to pick with hier creator, who, she murmurs to Caleb, plans to &ldquo,switch hier off&rdquo, if she fails the Turing Test. By this point, the audience, if not the intoxicated Caleb, realizes that she is manipulating him te order to win his allegiance ter a plot to rebel against Nathan and escape the compound&mdash,to explore the glittering creation that, she knows, is out there. This appetite for using hier man-given consciousness to delight ter the world&mdash,something the human pc geeks around hier never bother to do&mdash,is something Ava shares with Samantha, and is part of both films&rsquo, ironic critique of our device-addicted ogenblik.
Ava&rsquo,s manipulativeness is, of course, what marks hier spil human&mdash,spil human spil Eve herself, who also may be said to have achieved utter humanity by rebelling against hier creator ter a bid for prohibited skill. Here the movie&rsquo,s knowing allusions to Genesis reach a satisfying orgasm. Just after Ava&rsquo,s bloody rebellion against Nathan&mdash,the ogenblik that marks hier emergence into human &ldquo,consciousness&rdquo,&mdash,she, like Eve, becomes aware that she is naked. Moving from toilet to toilet ter Nathan&rsquo,s now-abandoned rooms, she nesthaar a wig and covers up hier exposed mechanical limbs with synthetic skin and then with clothing: only then does she uitgang hier prison at last and pull out herself on the world. She pilfers the skin and clothes from discarded earlier models of female robots, which she finds inwards the closets. All of them, amusingly, have the names of porn starlets: Jasmine, Jade, Amber. Why does the creator create? Because he&rsquo,s horny.
All this is sleekly done and amusingly provocative: unlike Hier, Ex Martinete has a literary awareness, overduidelijk te its allusions to Genesis, Prometheus, and other mythic predecessors, that enriches the emparentado narrative. Among other things, there is the matter of the title. The word missing from the famous phrase to which it alludes is, of course, deus, &ldquo,maker&rdquo,: the glaring omission only highlights further the question at the heart of this story, which is the biblical one: What is the relation of the creature to hier creator? Te this retelling of that old story, spil ter Genesis itself, the response is not a blessed one. &ldquo,It&rsquo,s strange to have made something that hates you,&rdquo, Ava hisses at Nathan before finalizing hier rebellious plot.
But spil I observed the final moments, te which, spil te a switch sides striptease, Ava leisurely hides away hier mechanical nakedness, covering up the titanium and the cables, it occurred to mij that there might be another anxiety hiding ter Garland&rsquo,s shrewd filmrolletje. Could this remarkably quiet speelfilm be a parable about the desire for a comeback to &ldquo,reality&rdquo, ter science-fiction filmmaking&mdash,about the desire for humanizing a genre whose technology has evolved so greatly that it often eschews human actors, to say nothing of human feeling, altogether?
Ex Martinete, like Hier and all their predecessors going back to 2001, is about machines that develop human qualities: emotions, sneakiness, a higher consciousness, the capability to love, and so forward. But by this point you have to wonder whether that&rsquo,s a kleintje of narrative reaction formation&mdash,whether the verdadero concern, one that&rsquo,s bot growing ter the four decades since the advent of the private laptop, is that wij are the ones who have undergone an evolutionary switch, that ter our lives and, more and more, ter our kunst, wij&rsquo,re ter danger of losing our humanity, of becoming indistinguishable from our gadgets.